Mozilla vs. .Net?

Friday February 9th, 2001

Ian Davey writes:
"An interesting article 'Mozilla takes on Microsoft.Net' has appeared at ZDNet with some quotes from the Mozilla community, and Microsoft's early attempts at spinning (and misunderstanding) XUL."

#9 Re: What I think of .Net

by macpeep

Thursday February 15th, 2001 1:19 AM

You are replying to this message

I'm laughing at your comments already. NOT putting all resources to it but just doing it half-assed would be stupid by MS. If they are going to do .NET at all, they might as well do it as well as they possibly can, with as many resources behind it as they possibly can.

.NET is conceptually very much like Java. You have a virtual machine (CLR = common language runtime) and a standard library (like the Java core API). The biggest difference is that you can code to it using any language, since your code will only be compiled to an intermediate form (think Java bytecode) and then compiled to native, optimized code the first time you run it. The final compiled code is then cached for further use. This gives you cross platform AND speed AND cross language, all at once. Even if you don't get cross platform unless someone implements the CLR on other platforms than Windows, you still get a great system where you can write Windows apps using Perl, with some parts being VB, other being C++, others C#..

Which brings us to another component of .NET.. C# (C-sharp). A very well designed language that rivals and even surpasses Java in many areas. It has the best of C++ and the best of Java, combined in a great way so that you can switch between safe, garbage collected mode to unsafe mode where you manage memory yourself (for the parts that need to be really fast).

.NET has a lot of potential. Just knocking it straight away because it comes from Microsoft is really stupid.

I'm not a big fan of Microsoft myself but .NET kicks ass. Knocking it with a comment like "I think it's crap" without giving any reasons is dumb.